On Mon, 5 Nov 2012 12:09:55 -0800 Tejun Heo <t...@kernel.org> wrote: > Hey, Alan. > > On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 08:12:08PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > > There are two sensible choices here IMHO > > > > - The simple sysctl > > > > - Doing the job right > > > > A half way solution such as that you are proposing seems to me to achieve > > nothing other than guaranteeing we'll have another pile of useless crap > > to maintain forever as ABI. > > I'm all for simple. Just throw in a sysfs binary switch to allow all > SG_IO for a given block device for users w/ write access. I'd be > completely happy with that.
IMHO that's the best option for now - if it fixes the specific case of concern right now. It's a trivial interface, it's trivial security (need to check CAP_SYS_RAWIO to flip) and it means that the job can be done properly when there is consensus without a whole extra legacy API stuck behind. Alan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
